New Indy Jones movie: God awful

[BamaGrad03 0]

Worst movie I've seen in 2 years. It saddens me that they soiled such a spectacular series with that piece of sewage.

[SouthLink02 8]

The first reviews of it were absolutely terrible

Then I saw that it got solid reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and thought maybe it was ok

Then I had 4-5 different people tell me that they saw it last night and absolutely hated it

Too over-done was the general consensus

[Ranger12 53]

I actually thought it was pretty good. It was worth the price of admission for sure, which is something I think most movies are not these days. It was not the best movie I have seen in the last couple of years, but not one of the worst by far. I will buy it when it comes out on DVD.

If you think this is going to be like the first three, then you will be disappointed. Even Harrison Ford was quoted as saying as much. This movie was basically to close out Indy's "adventures" and maybe start something new if things go well enough with the response.

I went with a group of people that included my wife, dad, brother, a buddy and his son, and my brother-in-law. We all thought it was a decent movie. Dad thought it was as good as the other three. I think it it was at least as good as Temple of Doom, but not near as good as Raiders and not quite as good as The Last Crusade.

Thing is, there are going to be opinions all of the spectrum about this one. It depends how much reverence you have for the originals. My buddy and I actually had low expectations, but were not disappointed like we though we would be. Could it have been better? Yes. However, I did enjoy some of the "nostalgic" things that Lucas threw into it. For those of you that watched The Young Indiana Jones series, you will catch some other things also. I really liked it when Indiana said "I have a bad feeling about this", which all you Star Wars fans will know the significance of that.

For the most part, I have low expectations for most movies that come out these days anyway. Most seem to be rapidly thrown together trash. This movie does not fall into that category for me, but it also is not going to win any Oscars either. I think it was much better then recent remakes and sequels such as Rocky Balboa, Spiderman 3, and both Fantastic Four movies. It was not near as good as Transformers and Iron Man though.

[WarDamn 0]

Actually just got in from the theatre. Heck i thought it was pretty good myself. Im a huge Indy fan and thought the bits and pieces of nostalgic material thrown in was a great addition to a really fun movie.

For goodness sake people, its Indiana Jones not some awe inspiring Oscar award winning picture. It's meant to be a fun ride and I think it accompllished that quite well. I think if you go back and watch the originals you realize they werent nessessarily great movies themselves (TOD being the worse of the three and now the four)

I'll definatly own it on DVD and I would love to see an Indy 5 as long as Harrison stars. Then again, I'm a fanboy.

[tiger88 934]

A friend of mine at work saw it and said it sucked really badly.

I saw ironman this weekend and it was pretty good. 7.5 out of 10 I'd say.

[BamaGrad03 0]

************************** SPOILER ALERT**********************

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Are you people serious? They made the movie about ALIENS. It's an Indiana Jones movie...ENTIRELY ABOUT ALIENS!?!?!

[BZ770 2]

Some I hate:

"There's 2 hours of my life I'll never get back"...regardless of the movie being good or bad, you aren't getting it back.

Sound Familiar?

[Ranger12 53]

BG, everybody has their own tastes bro. Some of us are not as picky as others.

I go to the movies to escape reality, not watch something that is supposed to be realistic. That is why I hate it when people go to a movie and say "that could never really happen in real life" and then bash the movie. It is a freakin' movie for crying out loud! If I want reality, I can turn on the news. The only time I want a movie to be realistic is if it is based on a historical event. Otherwise, if it is pure fiction, then I say go all out with the extreme.

Like somebody said, go back and watch the old Indy movies. They are not exactly down to earth with realism themselves. This latest movie is actually based upon old world myths and 6 of the supposed 13 crystal skulls have actually been found. The fact that some archaeologists think that Central and South American Indians, based upon drawings, may have been visited by aliens is also something discussed in that particular world of academia.

[Wishbone 0]

I had a strong reaction to this movie because the 1st one, Raiders of the Lost Ark, is my favorite movie of all time. I saw it twice in 1981 as a kid and I remember being blown away by it.

This new film was soul-less. Indiana Jones was more of a cartoon character doing matrix style stunts, unlike the Indiana Jones from the 1st movie who was portrayed as a real person who you really connected with emotionally. It could be that I am judging the movie really hard because of how good the 1st one was. Looking back, Temple of Doom and Last Crusade were mediocre films so I guess I shouldn't have expected too much.

I can't believe that Harrison Ford is 66. Where has all the time gone?

[Tigermike 3,661]

I had a strong reaction to this movie because the 1st one, Raiders of the Lost Ark, is my favorite movie of all time. I saw it twice in 1981 as a kid and I remember being blown away by it.

This new film was soul-less. Indiana Jones was more of a cartoon character doing matrix style stunts, unlike the Indiana Jones from the 1st movie who was portrayed as a real person who you really connected with emotionally. It could be that I am judging the movie really hard because of how good the 1st one was. Looking back, Temple of Doom and Last Crusade were mediocre films so I guess I shouldn't have expected too much.

I can't believe that Harrison Ford is 66. Where has all the time gone?

Harrison Ford was born July 13, 1942. As you said, he will be 66 in two months. Everyone slows down sooner or later. Also from what I have heard, Sean Connery was not in this movie either. Was he?

[Wishbone 0]

I had a strong reaction to this movie because the 1st one, Raiders of the Lost Ark, is my favorite movie of all time. I saw it twice in 1981 as a kid and I remember being blown away by it.

This new film was soul-less. Indiana Jones was more of a cartoon character doing matrix style stunts, unlike the Indiana Jones from the 1st movie who was portrayed as a real person who you really connected with emotionally. It could be that I am judging the movie really hard because of how good the 1st one was. Looking back, Temple of Doom and Last Crusade were mediocre films so I guess I shouldn't have expected too much.

I can't believe that Harrison Ford is 66. Where has all the time gone?

Harrison Ford was born July 13, 1942. As you said, he will be 66 in two months. Everyone slows down sooner or later. Also from what I have heard, Sean Connery was not in this movie either. Was he?

No, both Indy's father and Marcus are said to have both passed away in the previous year.

[Tigermike 3,661]

I had a strong reaction to this movie because the 1st one, Raiders of the Lost Ark, is my favorite movie of all time. I saw it twice in 1981 as a kid and I remember being blown away by it.

This new film was soul-less. Indiana Jones was more of a cartoon character doing matrix style stunts, unlike the Indiana Jones from the 1st movie who was portrayed as a real person who you really connected with emotionally. It could be that I am judging the movie really hard because of how good the 1st one was. Looking back, Temple of Doom and Last Crusade were mediocre films so I guess I shouldn't have expected too much.

I can't believe that Harrison Ford is 66. Where has all the time gone?

Harrison Ford was born July 13, 1942. As you said, he will be 66 in two months. Everyone slows down sooner or later. Also from what I have heard, Sean Connery was not in this movie either. Was he?

No, both Indy's father and Marcus are said to have both passed away in the previous year.

Marcus? Who was that?

The Temple of Doom - I remember Kate Capshaw.

[BamaGrad03 0]

BG, everybody has their own tastes bro. Some of us are not as picky as others.

I go to the movies to escape reality, not watch something that is supposed to be realistic. That is why I hate it when people go to a movie and say "that could never really happen in real life" and then bash the movie. It is a freakin' movie for crying out loud! If I want reality, I can turn on the news. The only time I want a movie to be realistic is if it is based on a historical event. Otherwise, if it is pure fiction, then I say go all out with the extreme.

Like somebody said, go back and watch the old Indy movies. They are not exactly down to earth with realism themselves. This latest movie is actually based upon old world myths and 6 of the supposed 13 crystal skulls have actually been found. The fact that some archaeologists think that Central and South American Indians, based upon drawings, may have been visited by aliens is also something discussed in that particular world of academia.

I understand that. And I love action movies, sci fi movies, all kinds of stuff that isn't balls on realistic. But this movie was over the top. You have 3 movies that are done one way, and one movie that goes and does it totally different. That bothers me. And I think it's disingenuos to get movie goers into the theaters under the Indy Jones name...only to show them a different movie.

We had a crystal skull with magical alien powers. We had Shia LeBouf swinging through a jungle Tarzan style...able to catch up with speeding vehicles via tree vine...we had 13 dead alien skeletons that turn into one super alien who's real. We had killer ants that can carry human bodies back to their underground fortress (which seemed like a ripoff from the Mummy). It was over the top stupidity. None of the first three were about aliens. This one was one big chase scene with the last 30 minutes being Close Encounters: Indiana Jones. That is so far off from the first three it's not even funny.

[Wishbone 0]

I had a strong reaction to this movie because the 1st one, Raiders of the Lost Ark, is my favorite movie of all time. I saw it twice in 1981 as a kid and I remember being blown away by it.

This new film was soul-less. Indiana Jones was more of a cartoon character doing matrix style stunts, unlike the Indiana Jones from the 1st movie who was portrayed as a real person who you really connected with emotionally. It could be that I am judging the movie really hard because of how good the 1st one was. Looking back, Temple of Doom and Last Crusade were mediocre films so I guess I shouldn't have expected too much.

I can't believe that Harrison Ford is 66. Where has all the time gone?

Harrison Ford was born July 13, 1942. As you said, he will be 66 in two months. Everyone slows down sooner or later. Also from what I have heard, Sean Connery was not in this movie either. Was he?

No, both Indy's father and Marcus are said to have both passed away in the previous year.

Marcus? Who was that?

The Temple of Doom - I remember Kate Capshaw.

Marcus was the older guy who was a side-kick of Indy's in the Last Crusade.

[Tigermike 3,661]

I had a strong reaction to this movie because the 1st one, Raiders of the Lost Ark, is my favorite movie of all time. I saw it twice in 1981 as a kid and I remember being blown away by it.

This new film was soul-less. Indiana Jones was more of a cartoon character doing matrix style stunts, unlike the Indiana Jones from the 1st movie who was portrayed as a real person who you really connected with emotionally. It could be that I am judging the movie really hard because of how good the 1st one was. Looking back, Temple of Doom and Last Crusade were mediocre films so I guess I shouldn't have expected too much.

I can't believe that Harrison Ford is 66. Where has all the time gone?

Harrison Ford was born July 13, 1942. As you said, he will be 66 in two months. Everyone slows down sooner or later. Also from what I have heard, Sean Connery was not in this movie either. Was he?

No, both Indy's father and Marcus are said to have both passed away in the previous year.

Marcus? Who was that?

The Temple of Doom - I remember Kate Capshaw.

Marcus was the older guy who was a side-kick of Indy's in the Last Crusade.

I was thinking that might be who it was. That character was played by Denholm Elliott, who actually did pass away. Date of Death:6 October 1992, Ibiza, Spain (AIDS)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097576/

Sean Connery just didn't want to make another.

[WarDamn 0]

BG, everybody has their own tastes bro. Some of us are not as picky as others.

I go to the movies to escape reality, not watch something that is supposed to be realistic. That is why I hate it when people go to a movie and say "that could never really happen in real life" and then bash the movie. It is a freakin' movie for crying out loud! If I want reality, I can turn on the news. The only time I want a movie to be realistic is if it is based on a historical event. Otherwise, if it is pure fiction, then I say go all out with the extreme.

Like somebody said, go back and watch the old Indy movies. They are not exactly down to earth with realism themselves. This latest movie is actually based upon old world myths and 6 of the supposed 13 crystal skulls have actually been found. The fact that some archaeologists think that Central and South American Indians, based upon drawings, may have been visited by aliens is also something discussed in that particular world of academia.

I understand that. And I love action movies, sci fi movies, all kinds of stuff that isn't balls on realistic. But this movie was over the top. You have 3 movies that are done one way, and one movie that goes and does it totally different. That bothers me. And I think it's disingenuos to get movie goers into the theaters under the Indy Jones name...only to show them a different movie.

We had a crystal skull with magical alien powers. We had Shia LeBouf swinging through a jungle Tarzan style...able to catch up with speeding vehicles via tree vine...we had 13 dead alien skeletons that turn into one super alien who's real. We had killer ants that can carry human bodies back to their underground fortress (which seemed like a ripoff from the Mummy). It was over the top stupidity. None of the first three were about aliens. This one was one big chase scene with the last 30 minutes being Close Encounters: Indiana Jones. That is so far off from the first three it's not even funny.

My opinion is that this is film was more in touch with Raiders and Crusade than Temple of Doom. TOD begins literally as if your watching Harrison Ford playing James Bond in "Club Obi Won" followed by parachuting from a plane with an inflatable raft, landing on a snow covered mountain, a Star Wars-esque speedbike seen on the raft and miraculously lands in a remote village where he rescues thousands of child laborers from an underground cult.

This movie brought us back to Indy's classroom, home, old-flame, etc and while the whole alien aspect may seem a little strange, as ranger said- there is backbone in reality for such a story.

[Tigermike 3,661]

This latest movie is actually based upon old world myths and 6 of the supposed 13 crystal skulls have actually been found. The fact that some archaeologists think that Central and South American Indians, based upon drawings, may have been visited by aliens is also something discussed in that particular world of academia.

If you are talking about the way the movie goes, OK. BUT,,,, if you are talking real life,,,,, then.

Just this past weekend I was watching a special on either the discovery channel or National Geographic channel about the crystal skulls. The expert stated that there are no crystal skulls that can be dated to ancient times. All those in existence have tool marks that would indicate they were manufactured in modern times. ie.. grinding wheel marks, tool marks, ad so forth. Now I wish I could remember what show that was on. Now I remember (google is great) it's the SCI FI Channel.

Mystery of the Crystal Skulls

The Indiana Jones special, “Mystery of the Crystal Skulls” will be airing on SCI FI Channel this Sunday at 9/8 C.

After multiple airings on the SCI FI Channel of the first three Indiana Jones blockbusters on May 17 and 18, the new special “Mystery of the Crystal Skulls” explores the true history of the legendary relic, unearthing the myths, legends and controversies that surround them. Could the skulls be ancient Mayan prophecies of doom or relics from the Lost City of Atlantis? Or do they, as some believe, store the vast knowledge of a highly advance extraterrestrial civilization. To try to answer these questions, SCI FI has launched an unprecedented expedition into the jungles of Belize to track down the missing skulls. It’s a quest worthy of Indiana Jones himself and one that tries to unlock the knowledge about humanity’s imminent destiny.

Lester Holt follows in the footsteps of British explorer and adventurer Frederick Mitchell-Hedges, an inspiration for the fictional Indiana Jones character, whose daughter discovered the first ancient crystal skull in the 1920s in the Mayan ruins of Lubaantun. Bill Homann, a modern-day adventurer and caretaker of the Mitchell-Hedges’ skull, joins Lester on the quest that takes them through the treacherous jungles of Belize and in the rough waters of the Honduran coast. Together, with clues that Homann obtained from Mitchell-Hedges’ daughter and local Mayans, they go in search of another missing skull while surviving the bat-ridden caves and alligator infested rivers. Along the way, they come across amazing discoveries including a hidden Mayan temple that could house more treasures.

For those who dont want to take the time to read the whole transcript the key quote is this:

“Now, I’m reluctant to burst anyone’s bubble, but before going further it’s necessary to clear up a few misconceptions. The Mitchell-Hedges skull is not quite 3,600 years old, and Mitchell-Hedges found it a little closer to home than Belize. In fact, he bought it from Sydney Burney, a London art dealer, through a Sotheby’s auction on October 15, 1943″

Brian includes links to an image of the actual recipt from southby’s auction and the research proving the actual, and totally non spiritual origin of the skull.

It’s a bummer, and would be cool if it were true, but alas, this is just another in a long line of new age hoaxes.

At least this is not another History Channel show spouting pseudo science and myth under the guise of a documentary. Its on the Sci-Fi channel for a reason.

Crystal Skulls Myth Debunked May 23rd, 2008

http://crystalskullsforsale.com/crystal-skull-myth-debunked/

[TexasTiger 14,078]

Worst movie I've seen in 2 years. It saddens me that they soiled such a spectacular series with that piece of sewage.

So what was even worse movie you saw two years ago? I don't want to rent it.

[Ranger12 53]

Mike, there was actually something on the History Channel very recently about the crystal skulls and also how well the Indiana Jones movies mirrored real archeology. There were several renowned archaeologists on the show and some said there was a debate in the community about the validity of the skulls. Both sides on the debate were shown. They mentioned that some believe they were made in modern times, however the methods used to prove that have been called into question. I don't remember the detail about all of that, but apparently, just like a lot of other myths, you have one side calling "shenanigans" and another side saying they have evidence to prove the myth. They did talk about fake crystal skulls, but they also talked about two of them being carbon dated to ancient times, but then examined with tool marks that would make them more modern. It was also mentioned that the Smithsonian supposedly has one, but does not display it for some reason, which some think the Smithsonian knows more then they are leading on, because if it was fake, then why do they even keep it?

Since I am not an archaeologist, I really have no way of knowing who is right and who is wrong. All I can go on is what I have watched and even read about after I got on the internet to look it up for myself. As you pointed out, most scientists seem to think the "discovered" skulls are more modern then the finder's/owner's claims. However, like I said, the story has a basis in real archeology and even though the ones that have been found and tested seem to come from the 19th century, there are still archaeologists that claim the real skulls have not been found yet.

The whole "aliens visiting the ancient Mayans and Aztecs" really has nothing to do with the crystal skull myth at all. It is an issue that is debated separately among archaeologists and scientists.

My point is that neither myth is something that was just made up for the movie, but was something real world archaeologists do talk about and debate. In this case, George Lucas and Steven Spielberg took two hot topics in the archeology community and combined them into one story. As I said earlier, I could not care less if it was based on anything real or not. I go to the movies to be entertained and fiction is more fun then reality most of the time.

[bojack34 2]

I had a strong reaction to this movie because the 1st one, Raiders of the Lost Ark, is my favorite movie of all time. I saw it twice in 1981 as a kid and I remember being blown away by it.

This new film was soul-less. Indiana Jones was more of a cartoon character doing matrix style stunts, unlike the Indiana Jones from the 1st movie who was portrayed as a real person who you really connected with emotionally. It could be that I am judging the movie really hard because of how good the 1st one was. Looking back, Temple of Doom and Last Crusade were mediocre films so I guess I shouldn't have expected too much.

I can't believe that Harrison Ford is 66. Where has all the time gone?

Harrison Ford was born July 13, 1942. As you said, he will be 66 in two months. Everyone slows down sooner or later. Also from what I have heard, Sean Connery was not in this movie either. Was he?

Their was a scene where they showed a photograph of Sean Connery.

[DCWarEagle 0]

I saw the new Indy movie over the weekend. I thought it was okay. I didn't have really high expectations going in. Raiders is one of my top ten favorite movies ever, and I knew it wasn't going to even be in that ballpark, and it wasn't. But I think it was in the same league as Temple and Crusade. Temple was a bit too dark (and the female lead was annoying). Crusade was a bit too jokey. Crystal Skull I actually thought struck an okay balance, it just went way over the top in a few scenes:

SPOILER ALERT:

SPOILER ALERT:

SPOILER ALERT:

The thing with the refrigerator was dumb, the monkeys were dumb and the climax with the aliens I was like "wait, I thought it was a couple of more months before the new X-Files movie comes out". The ants were also over the top, but I kind of enjoyed that, so I gave it a pass.

It is not a masterpiece by any stretch, but I enjoyed it as much or more than any action movie from last summer (Spidey 3, Pirates 3, Transformers, FF, etc).

I think Iron Man is the best action movie in a couple of years, and I'm anxoiusly awaiting both The Dark Knight and The X-Files 2.

[AUJarhead 70]

One thing that really bothered me about Indy IV was the CGI backgrounds. It looks too cartoony for me. Like the backgrounds were pulled out of the Phantom Menace.

The other thing that I didn't like was that I felt the character didn't have any "soul" so to speak. When I put in one of the old Indy movies, I feel like, as cheesy as this sounds, that Indy's a friend. It's the same thing that bothered me about the new Star Wars movies.

[BZ770 2]

I went and watched it this afternoon. AFter reading all the negative posts, I really enjoyed it. It was cheesy and had computer backgrounds, but overall it was a fun movie to watch on a saturday afternoon. I think that you will be seeing Shia Lebouf as a new Indy Jr. It was cool seeing him get married to Marion. It added closure and it was a classic good v evil.

[CircleDrill 178]

Do you think some of the negativity could simply be about what YOU bring to the movie as you watch it compared to when you saw the first ones?

For instance... my main mode of transportation when I saw Raiders of the Lost Ark was my bicycle. I probably had to do my homework and mow the grass before I could go see it or any of the others. I remember having to clean up my room before my mom would let me go see Temple of Doom with my Dad.... etc.

Now I am 33 and maybe it is me that has lost my sense of adventure and I am expecting the movie to affect me like I am a young boy?

[AUJarhead 70]

Do you think some of the negativity could simply be about what YOU bring to the movie as you watch it compared to when you saw the first ones?

I was thinking about that over the weekend. Maybe that would have applied to Star Wars, but I don't think Indy.

The other thing that bothers me, and what I think it most missing from Indy IV. Indy didn't do anything "heroic" the last 30 minutes. He doesn't save the day. He doesn't figure out the hard riddle at the end. He doesn't kill the main bad guy. He just reads a map. And then when things look bad, they basically run away.